Case 3320061/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M. Carter v Ymca — 2020
- Case reference
- 3320061/2019
- Decision date
- 6 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McNeill QC
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M. Carter
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt this open preliminary hearing, Employment Judge McNeill QC held that the claimant's arrears of pay claim was presented outside the applicable three-month time limit, as extended by the Acas early conciliation period. The tribunal considered the claim whether it was properly characterised as an unlawful deduction from wages claim under section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 or as a breach of contract claim under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994 and section 3 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal treated the case as a claim for arrears of pay, whether characterised as unlawful deductions under section 23 ERA 1996 or as breach of contract under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994. It was brought outside the three-month time limit, as extended by the Acas early conciliation period, and the claimant did not satisfy the tribunal that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.